MD 355 - South Corridor Advisory Committee Meeting # 10 Bethesda - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

MD 355 - South Corridor Advisory Committee Meeting # 10 Bethesda – Chevy Chase Regional Services Center Bethesda, Maryland May 16, 2017 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm

Welcome Agenda:  2017 Public Open House Summary  Conceptual Alternatives Report  Refined Alternatives to Advance to Next Phase  BRT Station Design  Next Steps 2 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

2017 Public Open House Summary • Winter 2017 Open Houses • February 7 th – Germantown • Montgomery College (Germantown Campus) • Over 60 attendees • February 8 th – Rockville • Montgomery County Executive Office Building • Over 60 attendees • 41 Comments Received 3 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

2017 Public Open House Summary (Cont’d) • Topics Covered • Project Planning Process • What is BRT? • Conceptual Alternatives • 3A – Mostly Median from Clarksburg to Grosvenor (via Observation Drive) • 3B – Mostly Median from Clarksburg to Bethesda • 4A – Mostly Curb from Clarksburg to Grosvenor • 4B – Mostly Curb from Clarksburg to Bethesda • Qualitative Results of the Analysis • BRT Station Design Concepts 4 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

2017 Public Open House Feedback • Safe accommodation of bike lanes within the roadway • Competition with parallel Metro service • Particularly redundant in the southern portion south of Rockville/Shady Grove • Lane Repurposing • Concerns about impact to traffic • Pleased with concepts’ attempt to stay within existing roadway • Sidewalk access to Grosvenor needs improvement • Adequate coordination between the MD 355 and MD 586 BRT projects • Corridor should be integrated into the local bus network to provide better door ‐ to ‐ door travel times 5 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

2017 Public Open House Feedback (Cont’d) • Section 1 – Grosvenor to Bethesda • Limited opportunities to build BRT infrastructure south of the Beltway without significant impacts • Service should continue to Bethesda • Consider alternate routing/means to access Bethesda Metro • Section 7 – Middlebrook Road to Redgrave Place/Clarksburg Outlets • Observation Drive may be more beneficial • Need to complete construction of unbuilt Observation Drive segments • Be mindful of impacts to the Cider Barrel 6 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Questions?  2017 Public Open House Summary  Q&A • Conceptual Alternatives Report • Refined Alternatives to Advance to Next Phase • BRT Station Design • Next Steps 7 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Conceptual Alternatives Report 8 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Information Covered in the CA Report and CAC Meetings Chapter Meeting # Open House/Report 1 – Project Overview 1, 2 2 – Draft Preliminary Purpose and Need 3, 5 2016 Public Open Houses 3 – Environmental Summary 2 4 – Conceptual Alternatives 6, 7 5 – Transit Ridership and Transportation 8, 9 Analysis 2017 Public Open Houses 6 – Public Involvement 7 – Conceptual Alternatives 8, 9 8 – Alternatives Advancing to Next Conceptual Alternatives 10 Phase Report 9 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Questions?  2017 Public Open House Summary  Conceptual Alternatives Report  Q&A • Refined Alternatives to Advance to Next Phase • BRT Station Design • Next Steps 10 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Elements of a BRT Alternative • Running way – A designated facility such as a striped/signed lane or exclusive busway in which the vehicle would travel between stations • Station locations ‐ Specific locations where passengers can access the service and the service can support the local land uses (residential, commercial, etc.) • Service plan ‐ The way in which BRT operates including service frequency, hours of service, routing and connecting services 11 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Conceptual Alternatives – Running Way Alternatives Considered • Alternative 1 No ‐ Build Moving forward to • Alternative 2 – Transportation next phase of study System Management (TSM) Primary Alternative Northern Limit Southern Limit BRT Alternatives Running Way 3A Clarksburg Outlets Grosvenor Metrorail Median 3B Redgrave Pl. (Clarksburg) Bethesda Metrorail 4A Redgrave Pl. (Clarksburg) Grosvenor Metrorail Curb 4B Redgrave Pl. (Clarksburg) Bethesda Metrorail 12 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Alternatives Advancing for Detailed Analysis Primary Alternative Running Alignment Northern Limit Southern Limit Way 1 No ‐ build N/A N/A 2 TSM Along MD 355 Along MD 355 and Bethesda Refined BRT Clarksburg Outlets 3C Median Observation Drive Alternatives Metrorail Station (Section 7) Along MD 355 and 4C* Curb Observation Drive (Section 7) * The option of routing the BRT in the curb along MD 355 from Redgrave Place to Middlebrook Road (Section 7) may be considered if the widening o f MD 355, as envisioned in the County’s Master Plan of Highways and Transitways, is pursued as a separate project. 13 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Alternative 2: TSM • Transportation Systems Management will be defined in the next phase • Would optimize existing system • Could include such enhancements as: Queue Transit Jumps Signal Priority Limited Stops TSM 14 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Key Takeaways Used to Refine BRT Alternatives • Median vs. Curb in Sections 2, 4 and 6 will influence running way decisions for Sections 1, 3 and 5 • Median running BRT along MD 355 results in faster travel times • Curb running BRT along MD 355 results in fewer impacts and lower costs • Higher ridership along Observation Drive • 50% more riders in Section 7 compared with the MD 355 alignment • Approximately 15 % of total corridor ridership is generated at stations south of Grosvenor Metrorail Station • Lane repurposing in Section 3 has the greatest overall negative impact on traffic • Operating in mixed traffic in Section 1 has the least impact on overall person throughput (County to study additional, potential mitigation strategies with lane repurposing conditions) 15 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

16 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

17 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Alternatives Screening and Selection Process 1. Identify Constraints { Current Phase CAC Input 2. Comparative Complete Screening Spring 2017 Public Input Recommend Alternatives for Detailed Analysis { 3. Detailed Analysis / Approximately Selection 2 years Alternative Recommendation 18 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Analyzing the Refined Alternatives in the Next Phase • Will be a balancing act • How do the potential benefits compare to what is required to Potential Potential realize those benefits? Benefits Challenges • Can any of these challenges be mitigated and/or contained? • Is there a “sweet spot”? 19 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

Questions?  2017 Public Open House Summary  Conceptual Alternatives Report  Refined Alternatives to Advance to Next Phase  Q&A • BRT Station Design • Next Steps 20 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt

BRT Station Design MD 355

Station Design - Background MCDOT is designing stations for the County’s future BRT network. The stations will have interchangeable, flexible components , that can be adapted for all corridors. This work is being done with a grant from the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments’ Transportation/Land-Use Connections Program, in partnership with architecture firm ZGF.

Station Design - Agenda • Introduction – Design Goals • Station Design - Best Practice Examples • MCDOT BRT Stations – Types and Amenities • Previous Community Input • Design Opportunities – Local Materials & Sustainability • The Station Family – Adaptation to Capacity and Context • Questions & Comments

Station Design - Goals 1. Easy to Find and Use 2. Accessible 3. Safe and Comfortable 4. Adaptable and Context Sensitive 5. Maintainable 6. Good Life-Cycle Investment Basic Rider Comfort = User Information Weather Protection / Rain and Wind Seating

Station Design – Best Practices

Station Design – Best Practices

Station Design - Types

Station Design – Amenities

Station Design – Community Input

Design Features – Local Materials

Design Features – Sustainability Energy Stormwater Management & Enhanced Landscape Production - PV

Station Family Type 1 Urban Streetfront – Shared Sidewalk 1 Marker + 1 Potential Small Potential Canopy Canopy Marker

1 Small Canopy & Landscape 1 Marker + Type 2 Landscape Station Family Canopy Marker

1 Large Canopy & Landscape 1 Marker + Type 3 Landscape Station Family Canopy Marker

Station Family Type 4 Landscape 1 Marker + 2 Large Canopies Canopy & Landscape Canopy Marker

Station Family Type 5 Canopy Marker Double Station – High Capacity Landscape Canopy 2 Markers + Canopy 4 Canopies Marker Canopy & Landscape

Station Family Type 6 Center Station Canopy Landscape Marker 2 Markers + 2 Canopies & Landscape Canopy Marker

Questions / Comments? BRT Station Design

Next Steps • Next phase to be lead by Montgomery County Department of Transportation. • MDOT will continue to be a key stakeholder in the project • Detailed analysis of the refined BRT alternatives as well as No ‐ build and TSM • CACs will continue to meet 39 montgomerycountymd.gov/brt